Australian Politics Forum

Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl Member Run Boards >> Environment >> There has been no warming since the year 1998 http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375841990 Message started by Ajax on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 12:19pm

Title: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 12:19pm

If we look at the graphs below most of the global warming during the 20th centrury happened before 1940.

So the AGW religion couldn't even get that right, they report that most of the warming happened after 1950.

When we all know that temperatures fell between 1940 and 1970 which sparked these very same clowns into action about global cooling and an ice age.

Quote:

To verify the claim that global warming since 1950 is mostly man made, we may compare the global warming rate in degree centigrade (deg C) per decade in one period before 1950 to that of a second period after 1950 to determine the effect of the increased human emission of CO2.

To be able to do this, we need to identify these two periods, which may be established from the Global Mean Temperature Anomaly (GMTA) data of the CRU shown in

Figure 1.

Quote:

As our objective is to verify the claim that global warming since 1950 is man made, we need to identify two global warming phases before and after 1950.

To clearly see the global warming and cooling phases, we plot just the Oscillating GMTA, which is the GMTA relative to the overall linear warming trend line shown in Figure 1.

This can be done by using an online software at

http://www.woodfortrees.org

by rotating the overall linear warming trend line to become horizontal by using a detrend value of 0.775 so that the Oscillating GMTA has neither overall warming nor cooling trend.

The noise from the Oscillating GMTA is then removed by taking five-years averages (compress = 60 months) of the GMTA.

The result thus obtained is shown in Figure 2.

Quote:

Figure 2 shows the following periods for relative global cooling and warming phases:

1. 30-years of global cooling from 1880 to 1910
2. 30-years of global warming from 1910 to 1940
3. 30-years of global cooling from 1940 to 1970
4. 30-years of global warming from 1970 to 2000

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/08/01/a-primer-for-disproving-ipcc%E2%80%99s-theory-of-man-made-global-warming-using-observed-temperature-data/

Quote:

One of the few non-controversial datasets in climate change is the Keeling curve, the graph of the concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere reproduced here:

Quote:

Human emissions of CO2 caused by burning of fossil fuels and production of cement have risen similarly:

Quote:

And the third data source to look at (for simplicity’s sake–we could actually look at dozens of data sources) is temperature changes.

This chart shows the global average temperature change from a ‘normal’ 30-year range from 1950-1980. It comes from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, led by scientist James Hansen.

Quote:

Here’s what temperatures look like more recently.

Now this is the interesting thing right, nearly one third of ALL manmade CO2 emissions have been sent up into our atmosphere since 1998, yet temperatures are dropping.

According to the alarmists temperatures would need to be sky rocketing.

Quote:

And almost one-third of that number, 110 billion metric tonnes, have occurred since that time in 1998 when temperatures reached their temporary plateau.

But one-third of all human emissions of CO2 have occurred since 1998. And temperatures haven’t budged as a result.

Full story here

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/06/a-problem-nearly-one-third-of-co2-emissions-occured-since-1998-and-it-hasnt-warmed/

keeling curve

Even the IPCC confirm temperatures have been dropping when CO2 emissions have increased.

Ipcc chart

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/11/does-co2-correlate-with-temperature-history-a-look-at-multiple-timescales-in-the-context-of-the-shakun-et-al-paper/

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 1:03pm

Why have the oceans continued to warm if there has been no warming since the year 1998?

http://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/2012-state-climate-ocean-heat-content

Why has global glacial mass balance continued to decrease if there has been no warming since the year 1998?
http://www.climate.gov/sites/default/files/styles/inline_all/public/glacierloss1980-2011_620.jpg?itok=ho6Uw1ow
http://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/2012-state-climate-glaciers

Why has sea level continued to rise if there has been no warming since the year 1998?

http://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/2012-state-climate-global-sea-level

Why has the arctic ice cap continued to melt if there has been no warming since the year 1998?

http://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/2012-state-climate-arctic-sea-ice

Any answers?

Or will you just continue to quote nonsense from denier blogs and tabloid newspaper columnists and pretend that decades of accumulated scientific evidence simply don't exist?

And why do continually repeat the lie:
the IPCC have admitted that there has been no warming since 1998?
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1366374129/47#47

We are waiting....

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 1:56pm

Once gain your clutching at straws........!!!!

Could it be a stransfer of heat.........?????

Remember the 3000 buoys from 2004 have not detected any increase in ocean heat down to 2000 metres.

Quote:

So let’s take a look at the North Atlantic ocean heat content data. Based on the linear trend, the ocean heat content data of the North Atlantic for the depths of 0-2000 meters haven’t warmed from 2005 to 2012. See Figure 4. And the data for depths of 0-700 meters show cooling in the North Atlantic. The additional warming at the depths of 700-2000 meters (illustrated by the “difference”) was comparable to the cooling at 0-700 meters, inferring there might simply have been an exchange of heat between two depth ranges, but there is no evidence of manmade greenhouse gas-driven warming in the North Atlantic from 2005-2012.

Quote:

Also recall that Mauritzen et al (2012) Importance of density-compensated temperature change for deep North Atlantic Ocean heat uptake (paywalled) found that while the upper 2000 meters of the North Atlantic warmed since the 1950s, the deep ocean below 2000 meters cooled, suggesting an exchange of heat between the deep ocean and the depths above 2000 meters. That cooling below 2000 meters is obviously not considered in the NODC ocean heat content data. Mauritzen et al (2012) was discussed in my post Is Ocean Heat Content All It’s Stacked up to Be? under the heading of SPEAKING OF STILL-TO-BE-DISCOVERED SUBSURFACE OCEAN PROCESSES.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/03/ocean-heat-content-0-to-2000-meters-why-arent-northern-hemisphere-oceans-warming-during-the-argo-era/

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 6:05pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 1:56pm:

Once gain your clutching at straws........!!!!

Could it be a stransfer of heat.........?????

Remember the 3000 buoys from 2004 have not detected any increase in ocean heat down to 2000 metres.

Yes - I am sure you can find all sorts of wacky "opinions" on those blogs you read.

But don't you think it would be better to form your own opinions on actual peer reviewed science?

Improved estimates of upper-ocean warming and multi-decadal sea-level rise

Here we report improved estimates of near-global ocean heat content and thermal expansion for the upper 300 m and 700 m of the ocean for 1950–2003, using statistical techniques that allow for sparse data coverage5, 6, 7 and applying recent corrections8 to reduce systematic biases in the most common ocean temperature observations9. Our ocean warming and thermal expansion trends for 1961–2003 are about 50 per cent larger than earlier estimates but about 40 per cent smaller for 1993–2003, which is consistent with the recognition that previously estimated rates for the 1990s had a positive bias as a result of instrumental errors8, 9, 10. On average, the decadal variability of the climate models with volcanic forcing now agrees approximately with the observations, but the modelled multi-decadal trends are smaller than observed. We add our observational estimate of upper-ocean thermal expansion to other contributions to sea-level rise and find that the sum of contributions from 1961 to 2003 is about 1.5 ± 0.4 mm yr-1, in good agreement with our updated estimate of near-global mean sea-level rise (using techniques established in earlier studies6, 7) of 1.6 ± 0.2 mm yr-1.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7198/full/nature07080.html

The oceans are warming.
This is why sea levels are rising.

If the oceans were not warming - why would sea levels be rising?

Do you have some "evidence" by a children's TV presenter or Daily Mail columnist to tell us that sea levels are not rising?

And we are still waiting for you to answer:
Why has global glacial mass balance continued to decrease if there has been no warming since the year 1998?
Why has the arctic ice cap continued to melt if there has been no warming since the year 1998?
And, why has sea level continued to rise if there has been no warming since the year 1998?

Any answers yet?

Or will you just continue to quote nonsense from denier blogs and tabloid newspaper columnists and pretend that decades of accumulated scientific evidence simply don't exist?

And why do you continually repeat the lie:
the IPCC have admitted that there has been no warming since 1998?
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1366374129/47#47

We are waiting....

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 6:35pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 6:05pm:

Yes - I am sure you can find all sorts of wacky "opinions" on those blogs you read.

But don't you think it would be better to form your own opinions on actual peer reviewed science?

There not opinions my friend there either actual empirical data that has been observed in the real world.

Or there estimates from physics other than computer simulated models including past physical data that has been observed in the real world.

Quote:

mproved estimates of upper-ocean warming and multi-decadal sea-level rise

Here we report improved estimates of near-global ocean heat content and thermal expansion for the upper 300 m and 700 m of the ocean for 1950–2003, using statistical techniques that allow for sparse data coverage5, 6, 7 and applying recent corrections8 to reduce systematic biases in the most common ocean temperature observations9. Our ocean warming and thermal expansion trends for 1961–2003 are about 50 per cent larger than earlier estimates but about 40 per cent smaller for 1993–2003, which is consistent with the recognition that previously estimated rates for the 1990s had a positive bias as a result of instrumental errors8, 9, 10. On average, the decadal variability of the climate models with volcanic forcing now agrees approximately with the observations, but the modelled multi-decadal trends are smaller than observed. We add our observational estimate of upper-ocean thermal expansion to other contributions to sea-level rise and find that the sum of contributions from 1961 to 2003 is about 1.5 ± 0.4 mm yr-1, in good agreement with our updated estimate of near-global mean sea-level rise (using techniques established in earlier studies6, 7) of 1.6 ± 0.2 mm yr-1.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7198/full/nature07080.html

So your asking me to put my faith in a computer simulated model that had data feed into it from a faulty piece of equipment which was late adjusted to suit real world observations.

Thats precisly what i have been argueing against, that these computer simulated models cannot replicate the real world without the operators fixing parametric boundaries and then adjusting them to suit there hypothesis.

Quote:

The oceans are warming.
This is why sea levels are rising.

3000 buoys in the ocean have collected observed data in the real world by diving down to depths of 2000 metres and recording the oceans temperature.

They say there is no warming.

Quote:

If the oceans were not warming - why would sea levels be rising?

How much have sea levels risen, from memory in one of your last posts i think it said 50mm (2"), that could be the error margin right there dont you think.

No measurement is worth the paper its written on without some sort of error margin.

I repeat today we have some of the lowest temperatures and CO2 levels in our atmosphere since our history began and you're going to tell me that we should be taxed on the air we breath because both have risen alittle....?

Quote:

Do you have some "evidence" by a children's TV presenter or Daily Mail columnist to tell us that sea levels are not rising?

So what they have gone up 50mm(2") thats probably less than the error margin for the reading.

Have a look here champ
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375838504

Quote:

And we are still waiting for you to answer:
Why has global glacial mass balance continued to decrease

Because the forrests and jungles at the foothill of the mountains has been turned into A4 paper.

Quote:

if there has been no warming since the year 1998?
Why has the arctic ice cap continued to melt if there has been no warming since the year 1998?

Natural cycle of the Earth, its happened before and it will happen again, nothing new, greenland was once farmed, what happened to the glaciers then....??????

Quote:

And, why has sea level continued to rise if there has been no warming since the year 1998?

SEE ABOVE....................

Quote:

Any answers yet?

I got plenty just keep asking.....1

Quote:

Or will you just continue to quote nonsense from denier blogs and tabloid newspaper columnists and pretend that decades of accumulated scientific evidence simply don't exist?

And computer simulated models are full of logic are they, sh!t in sh!t out computers are the dumbest pieces of equipment man has created, they will crunch any numbers whether it makes sense or NO.

Quote:

And why do you continually repeat the lie:
the IPCC have admitted that there has been no warming since 1998?
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1366374129/47#47

Its not a lie, if its not warming and the teperature is falling what else can it be?

Stalling....???????

I dont know what you see in the graph below, but i see cooling.

Quote:

We are waiting....

So am I.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 7:48pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 6:35pm:

...
There not opinions my friend there ...

I presume you mean "they're". Given your grammatical ineptitude, I deduce that you're uneducated.

For mine, I'm neither foolish enough to think that I know better than the vast majority of scientist who are best qualified in climate science nor dishonest enough to pretend that I am. Which are you?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 8:45pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 6:35pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 6:05pm:

Yes - I am sure you can find all sorts of wacky "opinions" on those blogs you read.

But don't you think it would be better to form your own opinions on actual peer reviewed science?

There not opinions my friend there either actual empirical data that has been observed in the real world.

No they are not. Don't be silly

If they was "actual empirical data that has been observed in the real world" - you would be quoting from the scientific literature.

Not from silly blogs or the websites of Children's TV presenters.

BTW - we are still waiting for you to explain why you have been telling lies. You said that the IPCC claimed there has been "no warming for 15 years".

They didn't. You told a lie.

Don't yo think you should apologise for lying to the forum?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Deathridesahorse on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 8:46pm

# wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 7:48pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 6:35pm:

...
There not opinions my friend there ...

Ajax loves Daddy and his cigarette breath and that's all that matters...

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 8:48pm

[quote author=Ajax link=1375841990/4#4 date=1375864544
I dont know what you see in the graph below, but i see cooling.

[/quote]

What is that a graph of?

Could you give us some units?
Tull us what it is a graph of?
Where the data came from?
Any hints at all?

I am guessing it is a graph of temperature anomaly.
ANd it shows over a decade of positive anomaly.

That certainly doesn't show "cooling"

Over a decade of positive temperature anomaly!!!! How does that show "cooling"

You don't actually know what "temperature anomaly" means - do you.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 8:50pm

And we are still waiting for you to answer:

Why has global glacial mass balance continued to decrease if there has been no warming since the year 1998?
Why has the arctic ice cap continued to melt if there has been no warming since the year 1998?
And, why has sea level continued to rise if there has been no warming since the year 1998?

ANy answers?

Or just more running away?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:07pm

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm
For global records, 2010 is the hottest year on record, tied with 2005.

Even if we ignore long term trends and just look at the record-breakers, that wasn't the hottest year ever. Different reports show that, overall, 2005 was hotter than 1998. What's more, globally, the hottest 12-month period ever recorded was from June 2009 to May 2010.

Though humans love record-breakers, they don't, on their own, tell us a much about trends -- and it's trends that matter when monitoring Climate Change. Trends only appear by looking at all the data, globally, and taking into account other variables -- like the effects of the El Nino ocean current or sunspot activity -- not by cherry-picking single points.

There's also a tendency for some people just to concentrate on air temperatures when there are other, more useful, indicators that can perhaps give us a better idea how rapidly the world is warming. Oceans for instance -- due to their immense size and heat storing capability (called 'thermal mass') -- tend to give a much more 'steady' indication of the warming that is happening. Here records show that the Earth has been warming at a steady rate before and since 1998 and there's no signs of it slowing any time soon.

Land, atmosphere, and ice heating (red), 0-700 meter ocean heat content (OHC) increase (light blue), 700-2,000 meter OHC increase (dark blue). From Nuccitelli et al. (2012).

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:17pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 7^th, 2013 at 12:19pm:

... all know that temperatures fell between 1940 and 1970 which sparked these very same clowns into action about global cooling and an ice age.
...

Of course, you can link to validation of that assertion. You can, can't you?

http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm
The vast majority of climate papers in the 1970s predicted warming.

In the thirty years leading up to the 1970s, available temperature recordings suggested that there was a cooling trend. As a result some scientists suggested that the current inter-glacial period could rapidly draw to a close, which might result in the Earth plunging into a new ice age over the next few centuries. This idea could have been reinforced by the knowledge that the smog that climatologists call ‘aerosols’ – emitted by human activities into the atmosphere – also caused cooling. In fact, as temperature recording has improved in coverage, it’s become apparent that the cooling trend was most pronounced in northern land areas and that global temperature trends were in fact relatively steady during the period prior to 1970.

At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming – warming that would a much greater influence on global temperature than any possible natural or human-caused cooling effects.

By 1980 the predictions about ice ages had ceased, due to the overwhelming evidence contained in an increasing number of reports that warned of global warming. Unfortunately, the small number of predictions of an ice age appeared to be much more interesting than those of global warming, so it was those sensational 'Ice Age' stories in the press that so many people tend to remember.

The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:22pm

# wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:17pm:

Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.

Scientific consensus is not a scientific argument.

It's not even part of the scientific method.

And, what do climate scientists say about consensus ...

“..scientific issues cannot be decided by a vote of scientists. A consensus is not, at any given time, a good predictor of where the truth actually resides..”

Hmmm.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/

What else you got?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:30pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:22pm:

...
Scientific consensus is not a scientific argument.

It's not even part of the scientific method.
...

Are you saying that active scientists are ignorant of scientific method?

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:22pm:

...
What else you got?

Are you trolling? Again.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 11:21pm

# wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:30pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:22pm:

...
Scientific consensus is not a scientific argument.

It's not even part of the scientific method.
...

Are you saying that active scientists are ignorant of scientific method?

No, I'm saying "Scientific consensus is not a scientific argument."

Care to argue that point, or would you rather ignore it ... again?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 11:24pm

# wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:17pm:

... human beings are causing global warming.

And the word "gullible" has been removed from the dictionary.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_was_'gullible'_removed_from_the_dictionary

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 5:30am

Amazing people are still denying that there has been NO statistically significant warming for 15plus years, and month on month we are seeing cooling global temps.

Finally we are seeing an end of the AGW gravy train of tax payer funded government grant addicted junk scientists spruiking gullible governments the sky is falling (or was that oceans are rising ;D ;D)

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:08am

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 11:21pm:

# wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:30pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 8^th, 2013 at 9:22pm:

...
Scientific consensus is not a scientific argument.

It's not even part of the scientific method.
...

Are you saying that active scientists are ignorant of scientific method?

No, I'm saying "Scientific consensus is not a scientific argument."

Care to argue that point, or would you rather ignore it ... again?

OK, so you agree that the scientists are familiar with scientific method. The question was of consensus. That's a question of of logic.

First, what is consensus?
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/consensus 1. majority of opinion

You've already tacitly acknowledged that the majority of the best qualified agree, so there is no argument on that point.

The scientific argument is about the science, not the consensus.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:14am

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Amazing people are still denying that there has been NO statistically significant warming for 15plus years, and month on month we are seeing cooling global temps.
...

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375841990/10#10

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:48am

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:14am:

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Amazing people are still denying that there has been NO statistically significant warming for 15plus years, and month on month we are seeing cooling global temps.
...

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375841990/10#10

What is the point of referring to your own circular argument of stupidity?

Have a look here and see just how fine and upstanding the mainstream consensus abiding scientific communities really are....(and in the time honoured fashion of the real AGW cultists, conveniently forget it or label it unimportant because you don't like the source ;D ;D ;D ;D)

http://notrickszone.com/2013/08/07/noaa-confirms-model-defying-global-temperature-stagnation-2012-was-among-coolest-in-21st-century/

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:59am

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:48am:

...
What is the point ...

What would be the point of repeating myself?

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:48am:

Have a look here ...

Why would I bother with yet another loopy climate science denial site?

I'll stick with the mainstream. Enjoy your weird cult.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 8:04am

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:59am:

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:48am:

...
What is the point ...

What would be the point of repeating myself?

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:48am:

Have a look here ...

Why would I bother with yet another loopy climate science denial site?

I'll stick with the mainstream. Enjoy your weird cult.

Now that is funny. Don't over do it on the Kool Aid today....

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 8:33am

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:08am:

The scientific argument is about the science, not the consensus.

And if the science was credible and convincing the AGW disciples wouldn't need anything else.

However, they constantly try to defend their religion with the consensus "argument".

Not good enough.

This is about science, not opinion.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:13am

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 8:33am:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:08am:

The scientific argument is about the science, not the consensus.

And if the science was credible and convincing ...

Which it is, to healthy minds. We're going around in circles here.

It's pretty obvious that science confuses you, so let's put it in simpler terms. You're driving a car with your family inside and you come to a bridge. Before the bridge is a sign. The sign says: "97% of our best engineers warn that this bridge is at risk of collapsing. 2% say they're not sure whether it will stay up. 1% say it's fine." What do you do and why?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:26am

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:13am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 8:33am:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:08am:

The scientific argument is about the science, not the consensus.

And if the science was credible and convincing ...

LOL ;D

And now the cult resorts to analogies. Priceless.

If the science was credible and convincing there'd be no need for such childish comparisons.

[x] Consensus
[x] Analogies
[ ] Convincing Scientific Evidence :-/

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:30am

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 8:04am:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:59am:

...
I'll stick with the mainstream. Enjoy your weird cult.

Now that is funny. Don't over do it on the Kool Aid today....

Now that is funny. You've subconsciously validated my point.

"Kool Aid" refers to the poisoned drinks served to cult members at Jonestown. http://history1900s.about.com/od/1970s/p/jonestown.htm That cult was hardly a majority. Climate science deniers are a tiny minority. Which of us is imbibing from the poisoned cup?

Remember, the worst case of the risk you insist on taking is the end of all life on the planet.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:52am

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:13am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 8:33am:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:08am:

The scientific argument is about the science, not the consensus.

And if the science was credible and convincing ...

The only difference is that we already know (empirical experience) 97% of all reasons bridges fail. And it is very easy for a group of bridge engineers to inspect and diagnose a bridge - I mean, its just sitting there isn't it....static....not moving....inert......

The opposite is the case for the incredibly variable and diverse weather/climate systems, where we probably are only aware of 3% (random figure to point out how stupid your analogy is) of the mechanisms in place across the globe.

I'm just disappointed you didn't roll out the 'its just like insuring your house' furphy.....because NO its not!

Anyrate, back to the cult for you old matey ;D ;D

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:08am

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:26am:

...
If the science was credible and convincing ...

I'm neither fool enough to believe that I know better than the vast majority of the best qualified, nor dishonest enough to pretend that I do.

Which are you?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:14am

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:08am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:26am:

...
If the science was credible and convincing ...

I'm neither fool enough to believe that I know better than the vast majority of the best qualified, nor dishonest enough to pretend that I do.

Which are you?

I'm a sceptic, with a completely open mind.

There's always the chance that the AGW hypothesis might be correct. I've always said that. Currently though, there's not enough reliable, credible evidence to support it.

So, what are you? Do you believe there is any chance at all that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:18am

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:52am:

... the incredibly variable and diverse weather/climate systems, ...

I'm glad you brought that up. I've looked at the science and come to the conclusion that it's way beyond me. I'm left therefore to decide which opinions are most credible. In my experience, the balance of probabilities favours the majority.

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:52am:

I'm just disappointed you didn't roll out the 'its just like insuring your house' furphy...

Do you deny that it's a risk management exercise? What are the worst things that could happen?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF_anaVcCXg

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:21am

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:14am:

...
So, what are you? Do you believe there is any chance at all that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong?

All things are possible. The question is one of probabilities. In my experience, the balance of probabilities favours the majority.

Given the risks, I choose those of action over those of inaction.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:25am

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 11:03am

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:14am:

...
So, what are you? Do you believe there is any chance at all that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong?

All things are possible. The question is one of probabilities. In my experience, the balance of probabilities favours the majority.

Given the risks, I choose those of action over those of inaction.

Well, you seem to be a little more open-minded than most of the cult members. Good.

As far as action goes I have no problem with Governments taking preventative measures, just in case.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 11:22am

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 11:03am:

...
Well, you seem to be a little more open-minded than most of the cult members. Good.

Thanks, but your reference to "cult members" says otherwise of you.

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:14am:

...
I'm a sceptic, with a completely open mind.
...

Are you though? A sceptic is defined http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/skeptic as "1. a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual." To do that, you'd need access to all of the facts and the qualifications to interpret them.

When I looked in to global warming, I had to admit deficiencies in both areas. That's why I go with the majority of the best.

Do you have all of the facts? What are your qualifications?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:51pm

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 11:22am:

Do you have all of the facts?

"facts" ? ::) We're talking about climate science here.

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 11:22am:

What are your qualifications?

One does not need any formal qualifications to be a sceptic.

That's your ridiculous assessment, not mine (or anyone else's I would wager).

First your cult wants to condemn all non-members, and now you want to define who can and cannot be sceptical.

No wonder your religion is laughed at so often.

The AGW cult (and that's exactly what it is) needs to stick to the science and stop telling other people what they can and cannot do, and then they just might be taken a little more seriously in the future.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:52pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:26am:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 9:13am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 8:33am:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 7:08am:

The scientific argument is about the science, not the consensus.

And if the science was credible and convincing ...

Stop trying to pretend you are a "sceptic" Greggery.
You are a denier. Pure and simple.

You keep going on about no "Convincing Scientific Evidence" - yet you are unable to explain to us which part of the mountain of accumulated scientific evidence is not credible and why you think it is not credible.

It the accumulated evidence that tells us that CO2 is a greenhouse gas "not credible" If so - why?
It the accumulated evidence that tells us that greenhouse gasses re-emit heat to the earth's surface "not credible" If so - why?
It the accumulated evidence that tells us that CO2 and other anthropogenic greenhouse gasses are increasing in concentration in the atmosphere "not credible" If so - why?
It the accumulated evidence that tells us that the increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is from anthropogenic sources "not credible" If so - why?
It the accumulated evidence that tells us that the amount of downward longwave radiation is increasing "not credible" If so - why?
It the accumulated evidence that tells us that outgoing longwave radiation is decreasing in the same wavelength spectrum as are absorbed by anthropogenic greenhouse gasses "not credible" If so - why?
It the accumulated evidence that tells us that the earth is warming "not credible" If so - why?
It the accumulated evidence that tells us that global glacial mass balance is decreasing "not credible" If so - why?
"not credible"
It the accumulated evidence that tells us that extreme weather events are becoming more likely due to a warming atmosphere "not credible" If so - why?

Which particular piece or pieces of accumulated evidence do you consider to be "not credible" Greggery? And what are you basing that opinion on?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:55pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:

The AGW cult (and that's exactly what it is) needs to stick to the science and stop telling other people what they can and cannot do, and then they just might be taken a little more seriously in the future.

Good advice Greggery.

How about you try to "stick to the science" - rather than just blindly denying that it exists?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:01pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:52pm:

Stop trying to pretend you are a "sceptic" Greggery.
You are a denier. Pure and simple.

He we go: another arrogant cult member who thinks they can tell other people what they think or what they are.

I'm a sceptic. I've stated more times than I can remember that there is a chance that AGW could indeed be happening.

That's not a "denier" of anything, by any stretch of the imagination.

By continuing to call me a "denier" you demonstrate both your lack of understanding of the English language and your supercilious nature (which seems to be the price of admission in your cult). It also makes you a blatant liar, and yet you're the one who keeps asking people to apologise for telling lies.

I'm a sceptic bunny.

You said I'm not.

You told a lie to this forum. Why won't you apologise?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:03pm

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Amazing people are still denying that there has been NO statistically significant warming for 15plus years, and month on month we are seeing cooling global temps.

No - it is not amazing at all.

Because there has been considerable warming of the planet in the past 15 years.
This is beyond doubt - despite what a Daily Mail columnist may have told you

If the planet has not been warming in the past 15 years - why are ocean temperatures increasing?
If the planet has not been warming in the past 15 years - why is the arctic ice cap decreasing?
If the planet has not been warming in the past 15 years - why is global glacial mass balance decreasing?
If the planet has not been warming in the past 15 years - why are sea levels rising?
If the planet has not been warming in the past 15 years - why is the incidence of extreme weather events increasing globally?

“The latest ‘State of the Climate’ report shows that the Earth continues to heat, the atmosphere is heating, the worldwide ice loss continues, and other symptoms of our warming planet march forward, without cessation,” Abraham said. “A lot of people claim that global warming has magically stopped, but the facts, and the Earth, continue to disagree.”
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112917764/global-warming-not-slowing-noaa-report-080713/

“Many of the events that made 2012 such an interesting year are part of the long-term trends we see in a changing and varying climate—carbon levels are climbing, sea levels are rising, Arctic sea ice is melting, and our planet as a whole is becoming a warmer place,"
http://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/state-climate-2012-highlights

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:04pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:55pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:

Good advice Greggery.

You're welcome.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:05pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:01pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:52pm:

Stop trying to pretend you are a "sceptic" Greggery.
You are a denier. Pure and simple.

What are you basing your "scepticism" on Greggery?

"Scepticism" does not mean simply denying that evidence exists. That is what you are doing.
That is denial. Not "scepticism"

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:08pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:05pm:

"Scepticism" does not mean simply denying that evidence exists. That is what you are doing.

Incorrect.

I have stated on at least a dozen occaisions that the AGW cult has lots of evidence. Heaps of it, in fact.

Check my previous posts.

So, another lie from you.

Why won't you apologise to the forum?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:08pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:01pm:

By continuing to call me a "denier" you demonstrate both your lack of understanding of the English language and your supercilious nature (which seems to be the price of admission in your cult). It also makes you a blatant liar, and yet you're the one who keeps asking people to apologise for telling lies.

I would apologise Greggery if you could provide some basis for your scepticism other than just blind denial of evidence.

You tell us the evidence is not "credible"
What are you basing this opinion on Greggery?

Is the accumulated evidence that tells us that CO2 is a greenhouse gas "not credible" If so - why?
Is the accumulated evidence that tells us that greenhouse gasses re-emit heat to the earth's surface "not credible" If so - why?
Is the accumulated evidence that tells us that CO2 and other anthropogenic greenhouse gasses are increasing in concentration in the atmosphere "not credible" If so - why?
Is the accumulated evidence that tells us that the increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is from anthropogenic sources "not credible" If so - why?
Is the accumulated evidence that tells us that the amount of downward longwave radiation is increasing "not credible" If so - why?
Is the accumulated evidence that tells us that outgoing longwave radiation is decreasing in the same wavelength spectrum as are absorbed by anthropogenic greenhouse gasses "not credible" If so - why?
Is the accumulated evidence that tells us that the earth is warming "not credible" If so - why?
Is the accumulated evidence that tells us that global glacial mass balance is decreasing "not credible" If so - why?
Is the accumulated evidence that tells us that extreme weather events are becoming more likely due to a warming atmosphere "not credible" If so - why?

What is not "credible" Greggery?
Can you tell us?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:12pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:08pm:

I have stated on at least a dozen occaisions that the AGW cult has lots of evidence. Heaps of it, in fact.

Yes. "Heaps of it"

Yet you claim that it is neither "credible or convincing"

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 8:33am:

And if the science was credible and convincing the AGW disciples wouldn't need anything else.

What are you basing that opinion on Greggery? Something you heard Bolty say perhaps?

Can't you explain?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:18pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:12pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:08pm:

I have stated on at least a dozen occaisions that the AGW cult has lots of evidence. Heaps of it, in fact.

Yes. "Heaps of it"

Yet you claim that it is neither "credible or convincing"

Ah, so you admit now that you lied when you said that I was "simply denying that evidence exists."

Apology accepted.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:24pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:

...
One does not need any formal qualifications to be a sceptic.
...

Perhaps, but to be a genuine sceptic, one does need to know a bit. I came to the conclusion that I don't know enough to be a sceptic.

You've revealed that you are no better qualified or more knowledgeable than I. So, on what basis have you decided that such a tiny minority cult* is more credible than the mainstream?

* Before you object to my use of the word "cult"; is a cult generally a majority or a minority?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:32pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:14am:

...
There's always the chance that the AGW hypothesis might be correct. ... Currently though, there's not enough reliable, credible evidence to support it.
...

Bearing in mind that the vast majority of the best qualified hold a consistent position on Anthropogenic Global Warming, what are your qualifications for denying that there is "enough reliable, credible evidence to support it"?

Is your position scepticism or denial?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:38pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:03pm:

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Amazing people are still denying that there has been NO statistically significant warming for 15plus years, and month on month we are seeing cooling global temps.

Unfortunately I'm giving your inaccurate and mostly debunked nonsense circular argument of irrelevancies a shot of oxygen by replying, when any empirically (that's non computer modelled) information comes to hand demonstrating that any of these have been influenced in any way substantial (let alone catastrophically) by puny mankinds influences then I'll give a toss.

BTW - I said statistically significant warming and I noticed you studiously ignored what I said so that you could relaunch into your boorish cut 'n' paste - there is a pedantic difference and I know how much you like to spin the slightest misused wording into a handful of agonisingly toxic pages of utter tripe.

Is it your job to mix up the Kool Aid? Keep an eye on # I think she/he's been over doing it ;D ;D

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 3:27pm

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:

...
One does not need any formal qualifications to be a sceptic.
...

Perhaps, but to be a genuine sceptic, one does need to know a bit. I came to the conclusion that I don't know enough to be a sceptic.

Well perhaps you should acquire a bit more knowledge instead of just believing everything you're told.

Who knows, if you do enough research you might become a sceptic like me.

Not that I'm saying you should, by the way; it's entirely your own decision. However, scientific scepticism is quite healthy.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 3:29pm

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:32pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:14am:

...
There's always the chance that the AGW hypothesis might be correct. ... Currently though, there's not enough reliable, credible evidence to support it.
...

Scepticism.

As I've already explained to you, I am completely open-minded: AGW may indeed be happening.

Considering the evidence available at the moment though, I remain sceptical.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 4:07pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 3:27pm:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:

...
One does not need any formal qualifications to be a sceptic.
...

Perhaps, but to be a genuine sceptic, one does need to know a bit. I came to the conclusion that I don't know enough to be a sceptic.

Well perhaps you should acquire a bit more knowledge instead of just believing everything you're told.
...

I have neither the time nor the resources to learn a group of subjects as complex as climate science. On the evidence, neither do you.

A healthy ego knows when to let go. It then becomes a matter of deciding who's most trustworthy. On balance of probabilities, that's usually the majority.

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 3:27pm:

... scientific scepticism is quite healthy.

Mindless denial is anything but.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 4:09pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:32pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:14am:

...
There's always the chance that the AGW hypothesis might be correct. ... Currently though, there's not enough reliable, credible evidence to support it.
...

Scepticism.

As I've already explained to you, I am completely open-minded: AGW may indeed be happening.

Considering the evidence available at the moment though, I remain sceptical.

So what is your rationale for denying the credibility of the evidence upon which the vast majority of the best qualified rely?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 4:09pm

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

Mindless denial is anything but.

Well, we agree on something.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 6:13pm

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:38pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:03pm:

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Amazing people are still denying that there has been NO statistically significant warming for 15plus years, and month on month we are seeing cooling global temps.

Heh! I just gave you 5 examples of empirical evidence which clearly indicate that the planet is warming. Nothing to do with "computer modelling".

Empirical evidence.

You don't actually understand what these words you are using actually mean, do you.

You could read the latest published data about these 5 particular paramters and see the empirical evidence if you were really interested here:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/bams-state-of-the-climate/2012.php

But you are not interested in empirical evidence at all, are you.
You just want to deny it exists

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:38pm:

BTW - I said statistically significant warming and I noticed you studiously ignored what I said so that you could relaunch into your boorish cut 'n' paste - there is a pedantic difference and I know how much you like to spin the slightest misused wording into a handful of agonisingly toxic pages of utter tripe.

No - I provided your with 5 examples of empirically measured parameters which have shown statistically significant changes in the past 15 years that indicate that the planet is warming.

You don't actually understand what these words you are using actually mean, do you.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 6:16pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 3:27pm:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:

...
One does not need any formal qualifications to be a sceptic.
...

Perhaps, but to be a genuine sceptic, one does need to know a bit. I came to the conclusion that I don't know enough to be a sceptic.

Yes Greggery, scientific scepticism is quite healthy.

You should try it sometime.

Rather than just claiming that all evidence is not reliable or credible without providing a single piece of information to support this "opinion" of yours.

You are a denier Greggery.
Not a sceptic.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 6:18pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:32pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 10:14am:

...
There's always the chance that the AGW hypothesis might be correct. ... Currently though, there's not enough reliable, credible evidence to support it.
...

Scepticism.

As I've already explained to you, I am completely open-minded: AGW may indeed be happening.

Considering the evidence available at the moment though, I remain sceptical.

Which part of the evidence are you sceptical about Greggery?

Why can't you tell us?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 7:12am

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 6:13pm:

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:38pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:03pm:

Rider wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Amazing people are still denying that there has been NO statistically significant warming for 15plus years, and month on month we are seeing cooling global temps.

I'm pleased you mentioned the NOAH report...loving google....seems it is nothing but rehashed gloom rushed out to support Obumma and his new crusade to save the environment.

http://www.cato.org/blog/climate-rehash

"None of it is new. The NOAA report is simply a collection of rehashed stories that have already had their 15 minutes of fame, stories that we (and others) have already commented on, put into perspective, or debunked."

Your 5 particular examples fall into the above description, No these are not examples of man made catastrophic global warming, all you do is repeatedly, slavishly rehash slanted evidence of naturally occurring global events. Please stop inferring you have empirical evidence which ties these events inextricably to the tiny element of man made climate change.

I laughingly noticed you've recently added extreme weather events....hehe...now that's a screamer isn't it? Everyone has stepped aside from that howler except you.

Get back to me when one of the climate catastrophe predictions have been proven true. How are those feedback loops going with all the co2 now.....oops temps are coming down....

People making these claims should be accused of making false and misleading claims, imagine the rage if a public company obtained billions of dollars of tax payers money by making these outlandish claims, ACCC would have a field day slapping fines on all and sundry.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 10:17am

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 4:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

# wrote on Aug 9^th, 2013 at 1:32pm:

...
Bearing in mind that the vast majority of the best qualified hold a consistent position on Anthropogenic Global Warming, what are your qualifications for denying that there is "enough reliable, credible evidence to support it"?

Is your position scepticism or denial?

Scepticism.

As I've already explained to you, I am completely open-minded: AGW may indeed be happening.

Considering the evidence available at the moment though, I remain sceptical.

So what is your rationale for denying the credibility of the evidence upon which the vast majority of the best qualified rely?

From your failure to respond, I infer that you have no rational basis for your denial.

Given that scepticism is a rational philosophy, if your denial has no rational basis, is it scepticism? If your denial is not scepticism, are you a genuine sceptic?

You can easily establish your credibility by detailing your rationale. If you can't do that, then you might do yourself a favour by examining the reasons for your faith in a belief system that is not supported by the vast majority of the best qualified.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 12:45pm

Wheels fall of the global warming bullsh1t bus again.....when will the cultists work out they are being dudded??

Pretty good read this, I fully expect bunny and hash to see it as a shining example of warming......that is to be expected.

http://notrickszone.com/2013/08/09/major-danish-daily-warns-globe-may-be-on-path-to-little-ice-age-much-colder-winters-dramatic-consequences/

Major Danish Daily Warns: “Globe May Be On Path To Little Ice Age…Much Colder Winters…Dramatic Consequences”!

By P Gosselin on 9. August 2013

JP_1Another major European media outlet is asking: Where’s the global warming?

Image right: The August 7 edition of Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten, featured a major 2-page article on the globe’s 15-years of missing warming and the potential solar causes and implications.

Moreover, they are featuring prominent skeptic scientists who are warning of a potential little ice age and dismissing CO2 as a major climate driver. And all of this just before the release of the IPCC’s 5AR, no less!

Hope all the warmists offer a unreserved apology to the much maligned co2 - and I particularly liked this little bit...

JP asks scientist Sebastian Mernild of the Glaciology and Climate Change Laboratory Center for Scientific Studies in Chile, who insists that ocean currents have taken the heat “down to the deep sea”.

Once unthinkable just a few years ago, the European media and JP are now starting to admit the oceans are a poorly understood wild card in the climate equation after all. JP openly states, “The oceans are generally regarded as the big wildcard in the climate discussion.” Jylland Posten ends its 2-page feature story with questions and comments by Svensmark:

How should ocean water under 700 meters be warmed up without a warming in the upper part? … In the period 1990-2000 you could see a rise in the ocean temperatures, which fit with the greenhouse effect. But it hasn’t been seen for the last 10 years. Temperatures don’t rise without the heat content in the sea increasing. Several thousand buoys put into the sea to measure temperature haven’t registered any rise in sea temperatures.”

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 9:33pm

In Case anybody's wondering, notrickszone.com is yet another climate science denial site. Pierre Gosling seems the be an American with a Bachelor of Science living in Germany. The site basically rehashes fantasies from other denial sites.

The site is so low in the hierarchy that it barely registers. Here's one remark I found that mentions it http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/qa-be-an-honorable-ancestor-and-thoughts-on-media-framing/#comment-40480:
"The tricks of No Tricks Zone
You don’t have to be a scientist to see that most of the so-called climate skepticism out there is complete bollocks. Step up to the plate Pierre Gosselin in Germany who writes the ironically titled “No Tricks Zone” .

Take this. Amospheric changes on all 9 planets explains the cause of global warming as “the sun, stupid” . A real skeptic would doubt any conclusion that is so forthright but Pierre expresses no doubts whatsoever and if you don’t agree you’re stupid. But what evidence is there that warming on other planets and the Earth share the same cause? Pierre offers none . He has arrived at his explanation for global warming on the Earth by … looking at completely different planets. Unfortunately none of those other bodies in the solar system support life, a point that I have made to P but it seems to have gone past him.

A few days later Pierre’s headline is “NOAA Data Shows Slowing Sea Level Rise”. Pierre sorts the results of a selection of coastal stations around the globe into four categories which he calls ‘observed most recent rate trend’. Although he claims six stations show a ‘steady drop’ three of those (Karachi, Walvis Bay and Tenerife) actually record numerical rises in sea level. So how does Pierre arrive at his ‘observed most recent rate trend’? I ask if it’s simply Pierre’s opinion of the most recent direction of the line on the graph perhaps. “It was arrived at by looking at the data” is P’s cryptic response. He then suggests “your time would be better spent if you asked [Stefan] Rahmstorf at the PIK how they reached their conclusions of accelerating SLR. ” Quite."

Of course, to a dedicated denier, it's all Gospel. ::)

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 9:54pm

Rider wrote on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 12:45pm:

Why are you talking about newspaper articles and blog entries?

I take it that you have no peer reviewed research to refer to, so you resort to desperation?

Quote:

Major Danish Daily Warns

Opinions - They are all different, everybody's got one, and they all stink.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:52am

Quote:

There has been no warming since the year 1998

Is this the false statement thread? All frogs are green.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14527-climate-myths-global-warming-stopped-in-1998.html#.UgbEoawR-R0

That's an explanation from New Scientist, but of course if you don't trust that thar book larnin', it's a wasted message because we all know that you can't trust book larnin'. They are all conspiring to steal all your money and your girlfriend or whatever, so just go down to the pub and ask a plumber.

Quote:

The August 7 print edition of the Danish Jyllands-Posten, the famous daily that published the “Muhammad caricatures“, features a full 2-page article bearing the headline:

They can do Mohammed caricatures, so they must be good. Wheels fall off! Wow.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 10:23am

Another mention of the obscure blogger http://www.skepticalscience.com/Video-Chuck-Kutscher-debunking-climate-skeptic-arguments.html#74841:

Quote:

I found that a blogger by the name of Pierre Gosselin posted rebuttals to my presentation. See Blogger Rebuttal

He indicates that he is an American with a B.S. in mechanical engineering, works in Germany and has an interest in meteorology. I honestly did not find his rebuttals helpful in improving my presentation. For example, there were the typical attack on Mann's work and a reference to urban heat island effects. Both have been thoroughly addressed in the peer-reviewed literature and yet continue to crop up on skeptic sites. Similarly, the fact that the sun is not the culprit has been proven in many peer-reviewed journal articles. There were also the personal attacks and name-calling: questioning how I ever got my Ph.D. (for the record, a portion of my dissertation work was published in the respected, peer-reviewed ASME Journal of Heat Transfer) and calling me an "armageddonist." I guess that's stronger than "alarmist." (He also called me "slippery." )

I will continue to point out to people that if you call attention to something that is genuinely alarming, then you're not an "alarmist." Further, my research work and most of my presentations focus on solutions, so while "doom and gloom" makes for a nice label, it's not representative of my position. I believe that a combination of renewable energy, nuclear power, and land use changes can help us avoid the worst effects of global warming, and I was a co-author of a peer-reviewed journal article (in Environmental Science and Technology) along with Jim Hansen and two others describing the various solutions. I only put together the rebuttal to skeptic arguments in response to a special request by our local state legislature representative.

So Gosselin has a BSc in mechanical engineering and an interest in meteorology. He pretends to know better than the vast majority of the best qualified: PhDs, supported by peer review.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 11:52am

For warming to occur temperatures should increase incrementally each year.

Unfortunately for the global warming religion temperatures have fallen since 1998 and have not risen above the 1998 value.

Now the global warming religion is scurrying around trying to defend its unequivocal warming statement.

The seas are not warming as the 3000 buoys who measure them forthightly are telling us.

The seas are not rising, as a 50mm(2") rise would be withinn the error margin.

There is no hot spot in the tropopause as weather ballons and satellite data are telling us.

The energy from the sun is waning this will be felt in the next few years as temperatures drop.

And that will be the nail in the coffin for Antropogenic Global Warming.

A lie that has been propogated by bankers and their corporations including big oil etc.

The bottom line for them is to tax the air we breathe and create a $2 trillion dollar market which will be more interested in increasing CO2 emissions.

When this happens all you fools and greenies that think trading carbon credits on the stock exchange will reduce real manmade pollution like chemicals being dumped into our waterways better take cover.

Today we have some of the coollest temperatures in our history we also have some of the lowest amounts of CO2 in our atmosphere EVER.

Wake up all you boys and girls that have been snared by the Antropogen Global Warming Religion and smell the CO2 FFS.

The death of the AGW religion is coming.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:13pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

For warming to occur temperatures should increase incrementally each year.

Strawman number 1. Utter rot. Nobody is saying that. There is short term natural variation due to solar cycles and the Southern Oscillation index etc. Of course it doesn't matter how many times denialists are told these things, they latch on to the same "temperatures must increase incrementally each year" fallacy.

Of course, as the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere increases, the forcing due to that CO2 must rise, and as we know, it's one of several forcings, including direct solar forcing itself.

The net effect is that the mean global temperature rises, but to consider it only over such a short period borders on ridiculous.

Water vapour is a positive feedback. As the temperature rises, on average, the water vapour concentration increases, which gives rise to higher global temperatures. The extent to which this leverage effect occurs is known as the climate sensititivity.

Past events, such as the regional phenomenon known as the "Medieval Warming Period" are indicators of climate sensitivity in the higher range.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:19pm

muso wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

For warming to occur temperatures should increase incrementally each year.

Strawman number 1. Utter rot. Nobody is saying that. There is short term natural variation due to solar cycles and the Southern Oscillation index etc. Of course it doesn't matter how many times denialists are told these things, they latch on to the same "temperatures must increase incrementally each year" fallacy.

You cant have it both ways champ.

If temperatures where increasing every year since 1998, you would just piont to them and say told you so.

What will you come up with in the next few years when temperatures keep falling.

Dont tell me you will say that global warming is in the background?????

The Earth's temperature rises and falls like a jaggered edge.

It cannot remain constant....???!!!!

Actually its impossible....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:41pm

muso wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

The sun's activities and the temperature of the Earth correlate quite nicely thank you very much.

Co2 and temperature donot correlate, CO2 follows temperature by a lag of about 800 years.

Quote:

Of course, as the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere increases, the forcing due to that CO2 must rise, and as we know, it's one of several forcings, including direct solar forcing itself.

Sure thing pal, but you forget to tell everyone that 770 gigatonnes per annum are from the ecosystems and 30 gigatonnnes per annum are from manmade emissions.

Why is that......????

Why is this NEVER EVER mentioned by dear old AL or the IPCC or Hansen....?????

Why dont they mention that in our past we had 20 times the CO2 we have today.....they act as though CO2 levels have NEVER been higher.

Again why is that.........???????

Quote:

The net effect is that the mean global temperature rises, but to consider it only over such a short period borders on ridiculous.

Well then how can they tax the air we breath just because we happened to be on a peak temperature curve.

Quote:

Water vapour is a positive feedback. As the temperature rises, on average, the water vapour concentration increases, which gives rise to higher global temperatures. The extent to which this leverage effect occurs is known as the climate sensititivity.

Yes and the computer simulated models tell us that there is a hot spot in the tropopause because of the water vapor and extra manmade CO2 that has accumulated there.

But weather baloons and satellites say there is no hotspot.

Case closed...................................!

Quote:

Past events, such as the regional phenomenon known as the "Medieval Warming Period" are indicators of climate sensitivity in the higher range.

You mean what happened during the medieval warm period isn't what just happened now but on a bigger time scale.

For the last few decades our sun was very active and temperatures increased now the sun is entering a quite phase and temperatures will fall.

This is what we've had recently, and on that information the carbon tax ETS all over the world should be scrapped.

Quote:

1. 30-years of global cooling from 1880 to 1910
2. 30-years of global warming from 1910 to 1940
3. 30-years of global cooling from 1940 to 1970
4. 30-years of global warming from 1970 to 2000

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:58pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:41pm:

Sure thing pal, but you forget to tell everyone that 770 gigatonnes per annum are from the ecosystems and 30 gigatonnnes per annum are from manmade emissions.

Are you saying that a net 770 Gigatonnes is entering the atmosphere from the ecosystems plus a net 30 gigatonnes from fossil fuel burning etc ?

Let me just check what you're saying......

Because, by my calculation, that's roughly 800 gigatonnes entering the atmosphere every year. In the last 10 years, the CO2 inventory must have increased by 8000 gigatonnes.

So if the total atmospheric inventory is only 2600 gigatonnes, why hasn't the CO2 concentration gone up by a factor of three?

Shorely shome mishtake.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:13pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

For warming to occur ...

Has it ever occurred to you that the only person you're fooling with your belief that you know what you're talking about is yourself?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by bobbythebat1 on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:18pm

muso wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

For warming to occur temperatures should increase incrementally each year.

Muso,
I thought water vapour was negative feedback?
Water vapour creates clouds which are white & reflect sunlight.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:19pm

muso wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:58pm:

Are you saying that a net 770 Gigatonnes is entering the atmosphere from the ecosystems plus a net 30 gigatonnes from fossil fuel burning etc ?

Exactly what i'm saying.........

Le
Quote:

t me just check what you're saying......

Because, by my calculation, that's roughly 800 gigatonnes entering the atmosphere every year. In the last 10 years, the CO2 inventory must have increased by 8000 gigatonnes.

Thats right your spot on, but you seemed to have forgotten about the sinks.

I know I know in the past the Earth's sinks have absorbed 7000ppm, every year the Earth's sinks can absorb the 770 gigatonnes the ecosystems throw up but they cannot absorb the 30 extra gigatonnes man throws up.

Thats malarkey..............!!!!!!!!!

Only the faithful believe that one.

Quote:

So if the total atmospheric inventory is only 2600 gigatonnes, why hasn't the CO2 concentration gone up by a factor of three?

Good question...............!!??

The hyposthises that man is responsible for the increase in CO2 is just that a hypothesis.

Where is the real proff????????

Quote:

Shorely shome mishtake.

Nope no mistake.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:25pm

# wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:13pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

For warming to occur ...

Has it ever occurred to you that the only person you're fooling with your belief that you know what you're talking about is yourself?

If the science was settled then we wouldn't have a leg to stand on .

Missing heat that cannot be explained.

No hot spot.

Oceans aren't warming.

And if they have risen by 50mm, thats withing the error margin making it negligible.

Putting your faith in computer simulated models Vs real world data, and both show different things...??

Doesn't it mean the hypothesis of AGW is WRONG.

Science is all about proving the hypothesis in the real world world isn't it?????

Ok boys i have to go and enjoy this manmade CO2 infested lovely afternoon, seeya on the flip side.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:27pm

From http://notrickszone.com/about-pierre-gosselin/:

Quote:

I’m a US citizen, received an Associate Degree in Civil Engineering at Vermont Technical College and a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Arizona in Tucson. Now I live in Europe and help my wife, the owner, run a small business ...

As a boy I had a strong interest in meteorology and even dreamed of becoming one for a time. I often read the weather charts ...

So Gosselin is the essentially unemployed holder of a BSc in mechanical engineering with an interest in meteorology, who pretends to know better than the vast majority of PhDs who work in the field of climate science and whose work has passed peer review. At least the fact that he's apparently unemployed explains why he has so much time for misinterpreting data and misrepresenting isolated fragments of information.

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:41pm:

...
Case closed...................................!
...

By the way, Ajax, what are your qualifications? How come you have so much time for misinterpretation and misrepresentation?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:31pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:19pm:

That can be measured, and it isn't malarkey.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:36pm

# wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:27pm:

By the way, Ajax, what are your qualifications? How come you have so much time for misinterpretation and misrepresentation?

Have some time couldn't resist this one.

Just because your educated it doesn't make you smart, you can teach a monkey to do anything cant you.

Look at you for example, your right behind this AGW religion, that is so politicized and backed by bankers you fail to see the bigger picture.

Sure if i ask you to do some calculus to prove something you might be up to it, this doesn't make you smart in life and society.

Do you honestly think that once the $2 trillion dollar carbon credit market kicks of, the people who are pushing for a tax on air now will be concerned with the amount of CO2 emissions.

If Al Gore's company starts trading carbon credits to the world do you think dear old Al will want to reduce CO2 emmsions.

Do you think the UN / IPCC will want to fore go 10% of the carbon tax ETS going to them????/

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:54pm

Bobby. wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:18pm:

...
I thought water vapour was negative feedback?
Water vapour creates clouds which are white & reflect sunlight.

I'm far from expert, but I'll give it a go.

Water vapour is a greenhouse gas. Most of what's in the atmosphere isn't cold enough to condense and therefore can't form clouds.

That's what the so-called Venus scenario is all about:
[list bull-blackball]

we reach a point at which evaporation exceeds precipitation;

water vapour being a greenhouse gas, we trigger a feedback loop;

eventually, all of the surface water is in the atmosphere.

With so much greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, temperatures at the surface rise to around 200 degrees Celsius. Somewhere in there, humanity's extinct along with the rest of life on the surface.

The scenario was modelled by Carl Sagan back in (iirc) the 1970s, using Venus as a model. It's thought that Venus once had oceans, much like Earth. Most of the water's still there, but it isn't liquid.

As Stephen Hawking said:

Quote:

We don’t know where global warming will stop but the worst case scenario is that the earth will become like its sister planet Venus, with a temperature of 250 degrees C and rain sulphuric acid. The human race could not survive in those conditions.

If you're interested, there's more at:
http://350orbust.com/2010/07/23/carl-sagan-and-stephen-hawking-on-effects-of-global-warming-the-runaway-greenhouse-effect-on-venus-is-a-valuable-reminder-to-take-the-increasing-greenhouse-effect-on-earth-seriously/

The part I find really interesting is what happens after that:
[list bull-blackball]

water vapour that circulates into the upper atmosphere is exposed to solar radiation;

the molecules break down into hydrogen and hydroxyl ions;

the hydrogen tends to escape into space;

the hydroxyl ions combine with other elements in the atmosphere to form acidic compounds;

after a few hundred millennia, there's very little molecular water left;

the increasingly dry atmosphere absorbs water from the planet itself;

the planet is sucked dry;

nothing that we might recognise as life survives.

The thing I find strange is the effect that environment has on the very substance of the planet. Without water, for example, rocks are much harder.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:23pm

Bobby. wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:18pm:

Muso,
I thought water vapour was negative feedback?
Water vapour creates clouds which are white & reflect sunlight.

It's not quite that simple. cloud albedo is part of the equation, and cloud feedbacks can be positive or negative. In addition to clouds, the water vapour in the atmosphere is in itself a greenhouse gas. It absorbs Longwave infrared radiation coming from the Earth and re-emits it in many different directions. That water vapour is not visible, but its concentration varies according to temperature.

That's a short answer. I'll try to give a more detailed explanation later if you need one.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:45pm

# wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:18pm:

...
I thought water vapour was negative feedback?
Water vapour creates clouds which are white & reflect sunlight.

we reach a point at which evaporation exceeds precipitation;

water vapour being a greenhouse gas, we trigger a feedback loop;

water vapour that circulates into the upper atmosphere is exposed to solar radiation;

the molecules break down into hydrogen and hydroxyl ions;

the hydrogen tends to escape into space;

the hydroxyl ions combine with other elements in the atmosphere to form acidic compounds;

after a few hundred millennia, there's very little molecular water left;

the increasingly dry atmosphere absorbs water from the planet itself;

the planet is sucked dry;

nothing that we might recognise as life survives.

The thing I find strange is the effect that environment has on the very substance of the planet. Without water, for example, rocks are much harder.

Did you mean this Carl Sagan...

And in 1985 he even got Carl Sagan involved, misleading people into thinking that the world would be 9 deg F hotter in merely 15 years.

“Few scientists now dispute that today’s soaring levels of carbon dioxide and other gases in the atmosphere will cause global temperature averages to rise by as much as nine degrees Fahrenheit sometime after the year 2000, Sagan said.” Robert Engleman, “Fossil Fuels Bring Trouble,” The Vindicator, Dec 12, 1985, p. 59
source

Only idiots would doubt what Carl has pontificated here. Approximately 4.5 Deg C warming in 15 years. How could we doubt? It WAS the consensus and consensus is the all in all of scientific knowledge. If everyone believes something wrong, it is bound to be true. Isn't that correct? That is what the eco-wacko global warming folks want you to believe.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

At least this Carl Sagan isn't making fraudulent eco-doomsday predictions with his ol' mate Jimmy Hansen anymore. Lucky for us google isn't dead and can remind us all of the claptrap these tax payer funded frauds are pumping out ;D ;D

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:48pm

muso wrote on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 9:54pm:

Rider wrote on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 12:45pm:

Why are you talking about newspaper articles and blog entries?

I take it that you have no peer reviewed research to refer to, so you resort to desperation?

Quote:

Major Danish Daily Warns

Opinions - They are all different, everybody's got one, and they all stink.

Oh, I didn't realise you were the 'source' police. Didn't like the message aye?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:54pm

# wrote on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 9:33pm:

And yet you quote Skepticalscience and some wacko 350something (no doubt throwing some eco panic about 350ppm of harmless plant food in the atmosphere ;D)..

Oh, hows that co2 going now, nearly at 400ppm, and still no runaway temperatures.....no haywire feedback loops?? how about some sea level rises....still nothing yet....do you reckon they'll get the rainfall predictions right for Wednesday??? More ice in Antarctic ... Arctic returning to freezing a month early....

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:07pm

Rider wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:54pm:

# wrote on Aug 10^th, 2013 at 9:33pm:

...
Of course, to a dedicated denier, it's all Gospel. ::)

...
Oh, hows that co2 going now, ...

As I said: "to a dedicated denier"... ::)

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:13pm

Rider wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:45pm:

...
Did you mean this Carl Saga[size=12]n...[b]
...

I mean the Carl Sagan who died last century, but remains one of the best minds we've ever had on the dynamics of global atmospheres. And the one you ignored: Stephen Hawking, who remains one of the best minds on the planet.

Rider, you're well out of your league.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:22pm

Rider wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:45pm:

So using that logic, if you give me a $100 note (something more than $50) for something that costs $40, you'd be happy with just $10 change.

I have this bridge for sale. It's very big and it looks like a massive coat hanger............

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:33pm

muso wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:22pm:

Rider wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:45pm:

no, I'm not selling bs and i'm definitely not buying it.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Rider on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:37pm

# wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:13pm:

Rider wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:45pm:

...
Did you mean this Carl Saga[size=12]n...[b]
...

what, 1996... Another circular argument of bs. It must sh1t you that I have a vote as well. Bad luck.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:37pm

Rider wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:48pm:

Oh, I didn't realise you were the 'source' police. Didn't like the message aye?

I'm just amused that you confuse peer reviewed scientific papers with newspaper articles.

Here are a couple of examples to help you understand the difference:

Quote:

International Journal of Spectroscopy
Volume 2013 (2013), Article ID 690186, 8 pages

Article: Carbon Dioxide Capture from Ambient Air Using Amine-Grafted Mesoporous Adsorbents

Annemarie Wagner,1 Bengt Steen,2 Göran Johansson,3 Ezio Zanghellini,1 Per Jacobsson,1 and Patrik Johansson1

1 Department of Applied Physics, Chalmers University of Technology, 412 96 Göteborg, Sweden
2 Department of Energy and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, 412 96 Göteborg, Sweden
3ETC Battery and FuelCells Sweden AB, 449 44 Nödinge Nol, SwedenReceived 26 February 2013; Accepted 31 March 2013Academic Editor: Rolf W. Berg Copyright © 2013 Annemarie Wagner et al.

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) have been identified as a major contributor to climate change. An attractive approach to tackle the increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere is direct extraction via absorption of CO2 from ambient air, to be subsequently desorbed and processed under controlled conditions. The feasibility of this approach depends on the sorbent material that should combine a long lifetime with nontoxicity, high selectivity for CO2, and favorable thermodynamic cycling properties. Adsorbents based on pore-expanded mesoporous silica grafted with amines have previously been found to combine high CO2 adsorption capacity at low partial pressures with operational stability under highly defined laboratory conditions..............

That was from a peer reviewed scientific paper.

Quote:

Qantas flying boats: Was air travel more fun in the 1930s?

KATE SCHNEIDER, TRAVEL EDITOR
news.com.au
August 10, 2013 6:48PM

SEVENTY five years ago, there was great excitement when Qantas launched its first Short Empire Flying Boat service between Rose Bay and Singapore.

In what's a bizarre sight to today's flyers, passengers climbed the wings of the plane and stood on top, as the aircraft sat in the water.

How things have changed

That was from a newspaper article designed for a reading age index of 12. Notice the difference?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 9:21pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

For warming to occur temperatures should increase incrementally each year.

Oh dear. Silly strawman time.

THere is more to global warming than the average surface temperature.

The oceans are warming.
Glaciers are melting
The arctic is melting.
Sea levels are rising.

The planet is warming.

Even if there did happen to be a particularly warm average global surface temperature according to one dataset (- others say 2010 or 2005 was warmer) in 1998.

Your Daily Mail columnist is wrong. The planet is warming. Even in the past 15 years.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 9:24pm

Rider wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:37pm:

# wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 8:13pm:

Rider wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 7:45pm:

...
Did you mean this Carl Saga[size=12]n...[b]
...

what, 1996... Another circular argument of bs. It must sh1t you that I have a vote as well. Bad luck.

Now, now. How you vote doesn't interest me. Pointing out your inadequacies, so innocent bystanders are less likely to be deceived, does. And don't you give me a lot to point out?

Inferior minds like yours will always make fools of themselves. Not that I claim superiority; all I need to do is quote the superior.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 9:25pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:41pm:

muso wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

The sun's activities and the temperature of the Earth correlate quite nicely thank you very much.

Not really..

If the warming we are experiencing over recent decades - and especially in the past 15 years, as oceans have continued to warm, glaciers have continued to melt, the arctic has continued to melt and sea levels have continued to rise - wre due only to solar activity - then we would expect all of the atmosphere to warm, wouldn't we?

Why is the stratosphere cooling?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 9:59pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:41pm:

The sun's activities and the temperature of the Earth correlate quite nicely thank you very much.

Actually they don't. False premise alert.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/solact.html

Quote:

The measured solar activity is well-correlated with the observed temperature variations, but does not follow the recent upturn in temperature as the originally published plot indicated.

solar_001.jpg (14 KB | 25 )

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 1:45am

muso wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 9:59pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:41pm:

The sun's activities and the temperature of the Earth correlate quite nicely thank you very much.

Actually they don't. False premise alert.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/solact.html

Quote:

The measured solar activity is well-correlated with the observed temperature variations, but does not follow the recent upturn in temperature as the originally published plot indicated.

Where did you get that graph from its not an IPCC graph is it?

The sun is responsible for temperature here on Earth not CO2.

CO2 lags temprature by about 800 years therefore how can CO2 drive temperature....????

It never has in the past so why should it now....??????

Check this list out.

(Baliunas & Jastrow 1990)
(Foukal & Lean 1990)
(Friis-Christensen & Lassen 1991)
(Lockwood et al 1992)
(Scuderi 1993)
(Charvatova & Strestik 1995)
(Balinius & Soon 1996-1998)
(Soon et al 1996)
(Hoyt & Schatten 1997)
(Nicola Scaffeta & Bruce J West 2008)

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 7:44am

Ajax wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 1:45am:

Where did you get that graph from its not an IPCC graph is it?

Actually it's from the University of Georgia. Good Southern Baptists. Thought you'd appreciate that.

Quote:

The sun is responsible for temperature here on Earth not CO2.

Gross simplification alert. The Earth's temperature is driven by heat input and output. If the output is reduced, heat accumulates resulting in higher global temperatures.

Quote:

CO2 lags temprature by about 800 years therefore how can CO2 drive temperature....????

What on earth are you talking about? If they are in the atmosphere, carbon dioxide, water vapour and other greenhouse gases act rapidly to absorb outgoing LW IR radiation, which is then re-radiated in random directions. The net effect is an increase in temperature.

We see the same effect in Winter. Water vapour is a greenhouse gas just like carbon dioxide. If the humidity is low, the nights will be cooler. Why do you think this is? It's because the heat escapes via the radiated Long wave Infrared. If there is rain during the day and the night is more humid, the greenhouse effect of the extra water vapour in the air results in higher night time temperatures.

That's the greenhouse effect in action. There is no 800 year lag. It's the same with carbon dioxide, except that CO2 stays in the atmosphere regardless of ambient temperature.

The greenhouse effect is a result of the innate properties of certain gas molecules to absorb and re-radiate IR from the Earth's surface. Atmospheric Physics 101.

Quote:

Check this list out.

(Baliunas & Jastrow 1990)
(Foukal & Lean 1990)
(Friis-Christensen & Lassen 1991)
(Lockwood et al 1992)
(Scuderi 1993)
(Charvatova & Strestik 1995)
(Balinius & Soon 1996-1998)
(Soon et al 1996)
(Hoyt & Schatten 1997)
(Nicola Scaffeta & Bruce J West 2008)

I suppose you're talking about ice cores.

What causes ice ages to start and finish again? Surprise me. What would any climate scientist in the world cite as the reason?

I'll make it easy for you:

A. Variations in Solar Activity caused by Orbital Variations.
B. A release of CO2 into the atmosphere causing warming.
C. Volcanoes
D. God willed them to occur.

Multiple choice. See if you get it right.

Did you enjoy it? Ok Here's another.

What do climate scientists say causes increases in Global temperature from time to time?

A. Always CO2
B. Always Water vapour
C. Always Solar Activity (orbital and other factors)
D. A combination of these factors and others, and the causes are not always the same.

Well?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 1:19pm

Its all there champ just have a look.

Quote:

Here is some of many.

(Baliunas & Jastrow 1990)
(Foukal & Lean 1990)
(Friis-Christensen & Lassen 1991)
(Lockwood et al 1992)
(Scuderi 1993)
(Charvatova & Strestik 1995)
(Balinius & Soon 1996-1998)
(Soon et al 1996)
(Hoyt & Schatten 1997)
(Nicola Scaffeta & Bruce J West 2008)

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 1:20pm

Peaks and troughs all part of the natural cycle of the Earth.

Quote:

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 3:49pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 1:20pm:

Peaks and troughs all part of the natural cycle of the Earth.
...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:06pm

# wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 3:49pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 1:20pm:

Peaks and troughs all part of the natural cycle of the Earth.
...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

Hey dude #

We all know skeptical science is to the AGW religion what the Vatican is to catholics.

And we all know that the disciples over at skeptical science have Al Gore as their messiah.

Hence their name algorians.

Sorry dude you really have to come up with a better source than the global warming extremist blog skeptical science.

The Antropogenic Global Warming Prophet Al Gore

Quote:

In March of 2012, the climate alarmist website Skeptical Science had their forums "hacked" and the contents posted online. In a forum thread titled, "Got a call from Al Gore's people today" John Cook proudly posted,

"This morning, had a long skype call with a guy working with Al Gore's Climate Reality Project. [...] He brought up the possibility of a partnership. [...] an exciting opportunity and another vindication of what we're doing" - John Cook [Skeptical Science], September 27, 2011

http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/09/skeptical-science-partnership-with-al.html

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:35pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:06pm:

...
We all know skeptical science is to the AGW religion what the Vatican is to catholics.
...

Web of Trust gives skepticalscience.com a high trust rating. Most of us, it seems recognise the site as a high quality resource, based on peer-reviewed science.

Unless, "we all" is your poor deluded group of one.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:47pm

# wrote on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:35pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:06pm:

...
We all know skeptical science is to the AGW religion what the Vatican is to catholics.
...

" ... they tell you how much other users trust this site."

Did you honestly think that the AGW disciples who use the site were going to say that they don't trust it?

No wonder you're so quick to fall under the spell of the AGW religion.

While I've got your attention ...

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 2:22pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:47pm:

# wrote on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:35pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:06pm:

...
We all know skeptical science is to the AGW religion what the Vatican is to catholics.
...

" ... they tell you how much other users trust this site."

Did you honestly think that the AGW disciples who use the site were going to say that they don't trust it?

All are welcome to contribute their input. A site isn't given a reputation rating until a substantial number of users have contributed.

Ajax wrote on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 1:06pm:

...
We all know ...

I provided evidence that he's wrong, unless the "we" to whom he refers is the tiny minority who deny climate science..

The fact that the vast majority deem Skeptical Science trustworthy is enough for me (and any healthy mind). A committed climate science denier, such as yourself*, (or a troll) will deny of course.

By the way, Skeptical Science is an example of true scepticism. It takes into account all of the evidence.

* bearing in mind that you've repeatedly failed to substantiate your "sceptic" claim

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 6:41pm

Skeptical science preach the religion we have all come to know as

Antropogenic Global Warming.

Its an alarmist blog with ties to Al Gore.

Quote:

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:07pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

...
Its an alarmist blog with ties to Al Gore.
...

Yet, outside the tiny minority who deny climate science, it has a good reputation. You have belief; I have a majority.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:10pm

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

...
Its an alarmist blog with ties to Al Gore.
...

Yet, outside the tiny minority who deny climate science, it has a good reputation. You have belief; I have a majority.

Dude I think you'll find that the majority of Australian DONOT believe in Antropogenic Global Warming.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:20pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:10pm:

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

...
Its an alarmist blog with ties to Al Gore.
...

Yet, outside the tiny minority who deny climate science, it has a good reputation. You have belief; I have a majority.

Dude I think you'll find that the majority of Australian DONOT believe in Antropogenic Global Warming.

You'll find that you can't substantiate that.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:40pm

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:10pm:

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

...
Its an alarmist blog with ties to Al Gore.
...

Yet, outside the tiny minority who deny climate science, it has a good reputation. You have belief; I have a majority.

Dude I think you'll find that the majority of Australian DONOT believe in Antropogenic Global Warming.

You'll find that you can't substantiate that.

From about 25 people at work 2 believe in AGW.

From my friends NONE.

From my family NONE.

If so many people believe in AGW, why not put it to the vote at these elections.

Well we kinda are in a way because Abbott said he would get rid of it, but that could also be because people have had a gut full of the labor green government.

That's why the labor/green government never put it to a vote.

Because the majority of Australian would've rejected it.

Even though they keep telling us the majority want it...??

How do they know...????

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 9:51pm

Argumentum ad populum again? Is that your answer for everything?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 6:19pm

muso wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 9:51pm:

Argumentum ad populum again? Is that your answer for everything?

Hey I'm just calling it as it is in my circles..!!!

Maybe in your circles 100% of the folks believe in AGW.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 6:57pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:10pm:

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

...
Its an alarmist blog with ties to Al Gore.
...

Yet, outside the tiny minority who deny climate science, it has a good reputation. You have belief; I have a majority.

Dude I think you'll find that the majority of Australian DONOT believe in Antropogenic Global Warming.

Really?!?!?

THen why do the majority of Australians want the Government to tackle climate change?

"How much should the federal government do to tackle climate change?"

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-26/antony-green-vote-compass-climate-change/4909774

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 7:05pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 6:19pm:

muso wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 9:51pm:

Argumentum ad populum again? Is that your answer for everything?

Hey I'm just calling it as it is in my circles..!!!

Maybe in your circles 100% of the folks believe in AGW.

Would this be your "circle"?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 8:39pm

How well do you speak Korean, Ajax?

This is where argumentum ad populum gets you in the richest country in the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYjjynROFuI

I couldn't believe just how ignorant people can be until I accidentally saw "Millionaire" on TV. I was amazed. Ignorant people must be more fertile or something.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 8:41pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 7:05pm:

Would this be your "circle"?

I thought he worked for Ronald.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 9:24pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 6:57pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:10pm:

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

...
Its an alarmist blog with ties to Al Gore.
...

Yet, outside the tiny minority who deny climate science, it has a good reputation. You have belief; I have a majority.

Dude I think you'll find that the majority of Australian DONOT believe in Antropogenic Global Warming.

Do you think that may have a certainty of 90%.

How many people where asked for that survey???

Was it fair or conducted amongst the AGW..?????

I know people are sick and tired of this labor / green government and may vote the libs in just to get rid of labor.

BUT if the majority are really serious about AGW then this would prove to help the labor green government stay in power don't you think?????

And I'm predicting a land slide win to the coaliation.

And the DEATH of the carbon tax/ETS system.

The majority know AGW is a scam.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 10:39pm

Do you really think this is about politics? Do you think I support the ALP?

Have I posted anything in support of the ALP?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by rabbitoh07 on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 11:23pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 9:24pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 6:57pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:10pm:

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

...
Its an alarmist blog with ties to Al Gore.
...

Yet, outside the tiny minority who deny climate science, it has a good reputation. You have belief; I have a majority.

Dude I think you'll find that the majority of Australian DONOT believe in Antropogenic Global Warming.

Do you think that may have a certainty of 90%.

How many people where asked for that survey???

Was it fair or conducted amongst the AGW..?????

I know people are sick and tired of this labor / green government and may vote the libs in just to get rid of labor.

BUT if the majority are really serious about AGW then this would prove to help the labor green government stay in power don't you think?????

And I'm predicting a land slide win to the coaliation.

And the DEATH of the carbon tax/ETS system.

The majority know AGW is a scam.

How many people where asked for that survey???

980,876

That is a pretty good survey
http://www.abc.net.au/votecompass/

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 8:40am

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:10pm:

...
Dude I think you'll find that the majority of Australian DONOT believe in Antropogenic Global Warming.

You'll find that you can't substantiate that.

Ajax wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 6:19pm:

...
Hey I'm just calling it as it is in my circles..!!!
...

Clearly, your "circles" aren't representative of Australia. Perhaps you need to find a less peculiar circle.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 8:42am

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 8:40am:

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:10pm:

...
Dude I think you'll find that the majority of Australian DONOT believe in Antropogenic Global Warming.

You'll find that you can't substantiate that.

Ajax wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 6:19pm:

...
Hey I'm just calling it as it is in my circles..!!!
...

Clearly, your "circles" aren't representative of Australia. Perhaps you need to find a less peculiar circle.

The election will give us some sort of indication as to how many people live in fear of AGW and the catatrsophe its likely to bring with a 95% chance or is that certainty..?? :D

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 8:47am

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 8:42am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 8:40am:

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:10pm:

...
Dude I think you'll find that the majority of Australian DONOT believe in Antropogenic Global Warming.

You'll find that you can't substantiate that.

Ajax wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 6:19pm:

...
Hey I'm just calling it as it is in my circles..!!!
...

Clearly, your "circles" aren't representative of Australia. Perhaps you need to find a less peculiar circle.

The election will give us some sort of indication as to how many people live in fear of AGW and the catatrsophe its likely to bring with a 95% chance or is that certainty..?? :D

But will it change the scientific consensus?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:12am

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:40pm:

...
From about 25 people at work 2 believe in AGW.

From my friends NONE.

From my family NONE.
...

Faced with your belligerent denial of climate science, perhaps most people just tell you what you want to hear.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:15am

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:12am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:40pm:

...
From about 25 people at work 2 believe in AGW.

From my friends NONE.

From my family NONE.
...

Faced with your belligerent denial of climate science, perhaps most people just tell you what you want to hear.

Not so dude, I certainely don't try to convert anyone.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:19am

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:15am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:12am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2013 at 4:40pm:

...
From about 25 people at work 2 believe in AGW.

From my friends NONE.

From my family NONE.
...

Faced with your belligerent denial of climate science, perhaps most people just tell you what you want to hear.

Not so dude, I certainely don't try to convert anyone.

Your behaviour here belies that assertion.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:39am

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:19am:

Your behaviour here belies that assertion.

I don't believe in Anthropogenic Global Warming....????

I think its a scam to fleece nations of their wealth and place its citizens in financial slavery for EVER.

The billions that the carbon tax ETS system is going to be sending to overseas institutions & corporations can be better spent here in our country.

http://youtu.be/zSI-L6uGa8M

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:17am

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:39am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:19am:

Your behaviour here belies that assertion.

You reckon it's all a grand conspiracy?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:21am

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:17am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:39am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:19am:

Your behaviour here belies that assertion.

You reckon it's all a grand conspiracy?

Why does everything have to be a conspiracy which then puts it on the back burner as though it came from a madman or something...???

The reality is bankers have had a sniff of a $2 trillion dollar market......the rest... well your a big boy and should know how the world works......!!!

Where the twin towers demolished or did they fall as the authorities said they did.....??????

Aren't we allowed to ask questions anymore.....????

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:27am

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

...
Aren't we allowed to ask questions anymore.....????

Beyond a point, don't questions call sanity into question?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:50am

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

...
Aren't we allowed to ask questions anymore.....????

Beyond a point, don't questions call sanity into question?

Depends on the circumstances.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 11:05am

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:50am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

...
Aren't we allowed to ask questions anymore.....????

Beyond a point, don't questions call sanity into question?

Depends on the circumstances.

Based on your behaviour, what will the readers' judgement be?

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 11:25am

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 11:05am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:50am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

...
Aren't we allowed to ask questions anymore.....????

Beyond a point, don't questions call sanity into question?

Depends on the circumstances.

Based on your behaviour, what will the readers' judgement be?

That's for them to decide.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 2:12pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 11:25am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 11:05am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:50am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

...
Aren't we allowed to ask questions anymore.....????

Beyond a point, don't questions call sanity into question?

Depends on the circumstances.

Based on your behaviour, what will the readers' judgement be?

That's for them to decide.

There are good reasons why the term "conspiracy theory" is so often preceded by the word "lunatic".

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 7:38pm

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 2:12pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 11:25am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 11:05am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:50am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

...
Aren't we allowed to ask questions anymore.....????

Beyond a point, don't questions call sanity into question?

Depends on the circumstances.

Based on your behaviour, what will the readers' judgement be?

That's for them to decide.

There are good reasons why the term "conspiracy theory" is so often preceded by the word "lunatic".

What about fanatic are you familiar with that term....????

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by # on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:40pm

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 7:38pm:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 2:12pm:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 11:25am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 11:05am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:50am:

# wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

Ajax wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

...
Aren't we allowed to ask questions anymore.....????

Beyond a point, don't questions call sanity into question?

Depends on the circumstances.

Based on your behaviour, what will the readers' judgement be?

That's for them to decide.

There are good reasons why the term "conspiracy theory" is so often preceded by the word "lunatic".

What about fanatic are you familiar with that term....????

More than I would like. ::)

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:54pm

A fanatic can be somebody who is obsessed with denying basic atmospheric science.

I think I'll lock a few of the older threads, There are too many threads on essentially the same topic.

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by Ajax on Aug 31^st, 2013 at 9:31am

muso wrote on Aug 30^th, 2013 at 9:54pm:

A fanatic can be somebody who is obsessed with denying basic atmospheric science.

I think I'll lock a few of the older threads, There are too many threads on essentially the same topic.

Yeah it could be both ways.

I would call you lot AGW fanatics but I don't think you're quite disciples yet although I could be wrong......???.. :P

Title: Re: There has been no warming since the year 1998
Post by muso on Aug 31^st, 2013 at 9:08pm

That's because you're a victim of "astroturfing". You show an amazing faith in Anthony Watts and Joanne Nova. You've read all their blog articles and you have one for every occasion. You have been brain-jacked.

Your repeated posts demonstrate nothing other than a predilection for ignoring the totality of the data by focusing on cherry-picked periods of time too short to rise to the level of statistical significance.